Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

compare scaffold folders instead of rebuilding #5186

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
May 21, 2024
Merged

compare scaffold folders instead of rebuilding #5186

merged 15 commits into from
May 21, 2024

Conversation

Geal
Copy link
Contributor

@Geal Geal commented May 16, 2024

This adds to the repository the files that the scaffold test is supposed to generate, makes sure they are built and tested as part of the workspace, then when the scaffold test runs, instead of rebuilding a router from scratch, we only compare that the generated folder is the same. To that end, we skip the generated Cargo.toml files because they will contain hardcoded paths dependent on the repository's path

Description here

Fixes #issue_number

Checklist

Complete the checklist (and note appropriate exceptions) before the PR is marked ready-for-review.

  • Changes are compatible1
  • Documentation2 completed
  • Performance impact assessed and acceptable
  • Tests added and passing3
    • Unit Tests
    • Integration Tests
    • Manual Tests

Exceptions

Note any exceptions here

Notes

Footnotes

  1. It may be appropriate to bring upcoming changes to the attention of other (impacted) groups. Please endeavour to do this before seeking PR approval. The mechanism for doing this will vary considerably, so use your judgement as to how and when to do this. ↩

  2. Configuration is an important part of many changes. Where applicable please try to document configuration examples. ↩

  3. Tick whichever testing boxes are applicable. If you are adding Manual Tests, please document the manual testing (extensively) in the Exceptions. ↩

@Geal
compare scaffold folders instead of rebuilding
c8d5f90 
This adds to the repository the files that the scaffold test is supposed
to generate, makes sure they are built and tested as part of the workspace,
then when the scaffold test runs, instead of rebuilding a router from
scratch, we only compare that the generated folder is the same.
To that end, we skip the generated `Cargo.toml` files because they will
contain hardcoded paths dependent on the repository's path
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

@Geal, please consider creating a changeset entry in /.changesets/. These instructions describe the process and tooling.

@router-perf
Copy link

router-perf bot commented May 16, 2024

CI performance tests

  • step - Basic stress test that steps up the number of users over time
  • events_big_cap_high_rate_callback - Stress test for events with a lot of users, deduplication enabled and high rate event with a big queue capacity using callback mode
  • large-request - Stress test with a 1 MB request payload
  • events - Stress test for events with a lot of users and deduplication ENABLED
  • xxlarge-request - Stress test with 100 MB request payload
  • events_without_dedup - Stress test for events with a lot of users and deduplication DISABLED
  • xlarge-request - Stress test with 10 MB request payload
  • step-jemalloc-tuning - Clone of the basic stress test for jemalloc tuning
  • events_callback - Stress test for events with a lot of users and deduplication ENABLED in callback mode
  • no-graphos - Basic stress test, no GraphOS.
  • reload - Reload test over a long period of time at a constant rate of users
  • events_big_cap_high_rate - Stress test for events with a lot of users, deduplication enabled and high rate event with a big queue capacity
  • events_without_dedup_callback - Stress test for events with a lot of users and deduplication DISABLED using callback mode
  • const - Basic stress test that runs with a constant number of users

@Geal Geal marked this pull request as ready for review May 16, 2024 16:48
@Geal Geal requested a review from a team May 16, 2024 16:49
SimonSapin
SimonSapin approved these changes May 17, 2024
View reviewed changes
apollo-router-scaffold/scaffold-test/Dockerfile
# Update our build image and install required packages
RUN apt-get update
RUN apt-get -y install \
npm \
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

npm is no longer needed when using router-bridge from crates.io, is it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

probably. I have not rewritten the templated Dockerfile to follow our latest version

apollo-router-scaffold/scaffold-test/README.md

2. Run the Apollo Router

During development it is convenient to use `cargo run` to run the Apollo Router as it will
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Was this sentence accidentally cut off?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

looks like it, but that was in the original template https://github.com/apollographql/router/blob/dev/apollo-router-scaffold/templates/base/README.md

apollo-router-scaffold/templates/plugin/src/plugins/{{snake_name}}.rs
Comment on lines +21 to +29
use serde::Deserialize;
use tower::BoxError;
{{#if type_auth}}
use apollo_router::layers::ServiceBuilderExt;
use std::ops::ControlFlow;
use tower::ServiceExt;
use tower::ServiceBuilder;
use tower::ServiceExt;
{{/if}}
{{#if type_tracing}}
use apollo_router::layers::ServiceBuilderExt;
use tower::ServiceExt;
use tower::ServiceBuilder;
use tower::ServiceExt;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are these changes intentional? They look possibly made by a formatter that does understand template conditionnals

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes, the formatter that understands template conditional was me 😅
The generated project that is now committed would be flagged by the lint step, the ignore option in rustfmt.toml is not stable yet, so I chose to format the project, then edit the template so it generates properly formatted code

@BrynCooke BrynCooke merged commit c6405c3 into dev May 21, 2024
13 of 14 checks passed
@BrynCooke BrynCooke deleted the geal/scaffold-compare-folder branch May 21, 2024 15:45
lrlna pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 3, 2024
@Geal @SimonSapin @lrlna
compare scaffold folders instead of rebuilding (#5186)
5ba2bb9 
Co-authored-by: Simon Sapin <[email protected]>
Geal added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 10, 2024
@Geal @SimonSapin
compare scaffold folders instead of rebuilding (#5186)
a8df798 
Co-authored-by: Simon Sapin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@SimonSapin SimonSapin SimonSapin approved these changes

@bnjjj bnjjj bnjjj approved these changes

Assignees

@Geal Geal

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
4 participants
@Geal @SimonSapin @bnjjj @BrynCooke